On 2016-06-01 10:13 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:56:41PM +0200, Micha?? Górny wrote
waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
I see this as at least a redundancy, if not a problem. First, let's
look at the general case. An optional "UI" (User Interface) is also
selected...
* via the "tools" useflag 78 times in use.local.desc
* via the "ncurses" useflag 10 times in use.local.desc.
* for a lot of ebuilds via the "ncurses" useflag in use.desc (So why
does "ncurses" show up in use.local.desc ???)
There is no need for an additional "TUI" (Text User Interface) use flag
for these cases. "tools" and/or "ncurses" tells you enough. Similarly,
"GUI" is grab-bag of gtk2/gtk3/qt4/qt5/X/Wayland/whatever. The only
thing they have in common is a hard-coded dependancy on graphics libs.
"GUI" is an implicit dependancy of gtk2/gtk3/qt4/qt5/X/Wayland/whatever.
Using any of them tells you enough. What do we accomplish by requiring
one more USE flag? This will also make dependancy resolution of ebuilds
more complex, i.e. slower. Why?
Simple regular users don't want to be concerned with choice of toolkit
for every single package, as long as a GUI is provided.
Then put one of X/xorg/wayland/mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk into USE in
make.conf. This will *FORCE* a gui where applicable.
Furthermore, this matches the recommended USE flag design where the
more important flags are provided as feature flags, while specific
dependency choice flags are minor.
This is going to require *THREE* levels of flags, with the first one
being totally unnecessary...
Level 1) GUI
Level 2) X or xorg or Wayland or Mir
Level 3) qt4 or qt5 or gtk2 or gtk3 or fltk
Let me re-phrase my question... is there *ANY* set of circumstances
under which any of X/xorg/wayland/mir/qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk USE flag
can be set for a package *WITHOUT* requiring a gui? I can see any of X
or xorg or Wayland or Mir being a requirement for any of
qt4/qt5/gtk2/gtk3/fltk. But any of the Level 2 or Level 3 flags *FORCES*
a GUI of one sort or another.
IMHO, you see this in reverse. the 'gui' useflag would be useful for
users who don't want to care about X/wayland/mir and do not want to care
about gtk/qt, they just want windows to be drawn for the applications
they install -- without, if possible, pulling useless dependencies.
I repeat, requiring a "GUI" use flag for GUI apps makes as much sense
as requiring a "TUI" flag for commandline apps. I hope I'm not giving
people ideas the wrong way. No I don't want a "TUI" flag either.
